240

Selection of Counsel by Attorne ̧s-Opinions of the Press.

steps paid for are, instead of necessary steps, mere blunders rectified? whether deeds and documents are not of unnecessary length and of unnecessary complexity? The layman obliged to have recourse to his Solicitor, is at his Solicitor's mercy, and the Solicitor is at the mercy of his counsel-whom, nevertheless, he selects for reasons dictated by the ties of family, or by the prospect of some selfish benefit. But not only so, for, according to the present system, an unfortunate client may become the victim of designing or ignorant men and unadvisedly hurried into a lawsuit which

will be his ruin.

"Facts such as these are sufficient to show that the Bar is patronised by the Solicitors and Attorneys-the physician by the apothecary. This cannot be right and ought not to continue. And assuredly, if the examination for admission to the Bar is to be a living system-if the hard student is to be fairly selected by the examiners from among those who are called to the Bar, and his name is to be published to the world as a man who has studied and is competent to give a legal opinion, the reformed system ought not to stop here.

end will be put to them, for of course it is not proposed that after a case has been sanctioned as a fit case for litigation by counsel, the counsel shall prepare the documents, collect the evidence, and manage the details. This must be left to the Attorney. The duty of the counsel will be, as it ought to be, to advise the suitor before he incurs any expense, and this, I doubt not, will be considered by the public no ordinary boon."

But it may be asked how are the intended "Masters-in-Law," who have passed a brilliant Examination, and are allowed to practise under the Bar, or who may subsequently be called to the Bar, to make known their abilities and learning to that part of the public who are contemplating the commencement of actions or suits, without the intervention of an attorney? Of course they are not to advertise their names or to solicit employment. It is true they will be noticed in the annual Law List with the honorary marks of M. L., or whatever other letters of the alphabet may be "The man who has been thus distinguished conferred by the Senate. But are not the must not be left to wear out his soul in a suitors more likely to go to men whose garret, until it shall occur to some eccentric Attorney to test his merits and to send him voices are heard in Court, and whose names business. Let the etiquette be dispensed with appear in the newspaper reports, than to by which a Barrister is forbidden to receive a students, however successful, but who are client without the intervention of an Attorney. unknown in any actual litigation? MoreLet any man be permitted to knock at a Bar- over, after all, every man of property, merrister's chambers, to state his case to counsel, chant, or trader of any consequence, knows and to ask his advice. Why perform the some one or more of the multitude of sodouble process of stating the case to an licitors, in whose knowledge, skill, and inAttorney, in order that he may restate it to counsel? Application should be made to the tegrity he can place entire confidence, and Thus, the best advice to whom he will resort, as a sufficient adwould be obtained without delay. Nor do I viser, or employ (if the case be doubtful) doubt that, under this improved state of to take the opinion of Counsel. things, many cases which now beget years of anxiety, would be settled in half an hour with

counsel at once.

out a pang.

"The plan suggested is nothing new. It is I understand that which is sanctioned by the practice of the Scotch Bar, and is alluded to by Sir Walter Scott himself in Guy Mannering,' where Paulus Pleydell, Esq., gives audience to Dandie Dinmont. Nor is it only because the plan in question would save expense to suitors that I recommend its adoption by the English Bar; but it is because I see no other means whereby a laborious and successful student, without Attorney connexion, can possibly succeed. Many a man has a legal difficulty which he would gladly lay before a barrister at once, if he could only do so without the roundabout process of proceeding through an Attorney. And this, indeed, would be the principal benefit of introducing the proposed change. Instead of a Barrister, when consulted directly, being compelled to act the part of a friend, and to take no fee, he might take his fee, and not only consult his own interest, but save his friend's delicacy.

"Nor need the Attorneys be afraid that an

Another writer in the same journal has, we think, satisfactorily answered the advocate for throwing open the chambers of Counsel for the purpose of advising the public without the aid of attorneys. He justly observes, that—

"In all professions alike, mediocrity having the advantage of connexion will earlier force itself into practice than mere ability without this advantage. Of this there can be no doubt. In all professions alike it is equally true, and ought not to be forgotten, that it is by no means the superior force of mere intellectual ability that determines the relative degrees of professional success. Tact, a practical turn of mind, promptitude, resolution-in short, all that is generally comprised in the word character,' as distinct from the possession of superior powers of mental intelligenceare necessarily and naturally the qualities that lead most readily and certainly to professional employment. Now in all these qualities it is notoriously quite possible for a man of high intellectual ability to be comparatively deficient. Many a senior wrangler and first-class

Selection of Counsel by Attorneys-Opinions of the Press.

241

"But where comparative success or failure is owing to so many other things besides the mere want of connexion, can any one, sir, suppose that merely enabling the Barrister to have personal and direct intercourse with his client would remedy the evils of which the laborious briefless complain? Surely not. The diffidence and the hauteur, the impracticability and the want of tact, which now leave our friend Vainlabour unvisited by Attorneys in his aerial solitude, would haunt him still. In the art of conciliating and attracting clients he would still be as much distanced by Silverspoon as he now is in the art of conciliating or attracting Attorneys. In fact, there is, I am convinced, a considerable amount of cant in the lamentations that are every now and then poured forth over the Vainlabours of the Bar. It is forgotten that, though they may have many talents, yet they have not the precise kind of talents which the active pursuit of their Profession imperatively demands. They may be good treatise writers, profound jurists, generally cultivated and accomplished men, but they do not possess the one talent which is worth all the rest-the talent for success in a bustling, pushing, and energetic professional career.

man possesses them in a very inferior degree frequently beyond the reach or beneath the to the self-taught and self-raised student. If cultivation of those in whom superior gifts are the latter, in addition to the possession of these closely connected with the pride of learning more practical requisites for success, is gifted, and the fatal shyness of a morbid and haughty as very often happens, with logical acumen, a reserve. faculty for the clear conduct of an abstract argument, and still more with the accomplishment of persuasively appealing to the passions and prejudices of ordinary minds, is it to be wondered at that in the race for forensic distinction he should leave at an immeasurable distance behind his more profound, but less usefully endowed, professional rival? It must never be lost sight of that quickness, fluency, knowledge of the world-the peculiar attributes of the advocate- are at least as much needed for succeeding in a profession like the Bar, as erudition, depth, and accuracy of reasoning powers-the proper acquirements of the jurist. To borrow your correspondent's illustration, if Mr Vainlabour-the friendless and briefiess martyr to juridicial studies-be a mere prodigy of legal learning, however profound, it is no marvel that he should be eclipsed by Mr. Silverspoon, who, though probably shallow, is yet relatively brilliant. If all your correspondent really means is, that an unbefriended man of learning has no chance in the competitory struggles of the English Bar with a well-connected man of more superficial but more showy attainments, he has been merely concerned in showing that to be the case in one profession which always has been and always must be the case in any profession. But even conceding Mr. Vainlabour to be a man possessed of every requisite for professional success except connexion, and Mr. Silverspoon to have that requisite, and scarcely any other, I think it may well be doubted whether the remedy he suggests will have the effect he supposes.

"As far as relates to the suggestion that Barristers, in all important cases at all events, should be permitted and encouraged in the freest communication with clients and witnesses, it is one in which I, sir, beg to express my heartiest concurrence. Nothing can be more absurd and artificial than the conventional rule of etiquette which in the present "One word, however, in passing, as to the practice of the English Bar is alleged to interpossible truth of the case he puts. Is it indeed fere with it. All I protest against is the infertrue, that the mere patronage of Attorneys can ence that the mere abolition of this rule of etiprovide an otherwise incompetent man with quette would, ipso facto, bring about a revolution remunerative practice at the English Bar? I, in the position and prospects of the existing memsir, must take leave to doubt this position-at bers of the English Bar. No, sir, if there is to least to the extent in which it is laid down by be a change in the relative position of the two your correspondent. That a certain amount branches of the Profession, let us have one of ordinary, or, as it is sometimes called, fa- less one-sided and more comprehensive than vour' business may be, and often is, put into this. Let us return to the principles of freea young Barrister's way at the outset, by a closely connected firm, is what no one doubts; but this cannot be carried beyond a certain point. If the object of this patronage be an incompetent person he soon breaks down, and is employed no longer; if competent, it merely comes to this, that connexion has given him an advantage which an equally competent man does not possess. This always has been, and always must be, the case, human nature remaining what it is; it is not peculiar to the Bar, it is common to all professions; it is the natural and necessary law of all branches of human employment. Be it also observed, in passing, that the faculty of conciliating and acquiring confidence and connexion is one of the legitimate arts of rising in life which is too

dom. Let us break down the monopoly by which the right of appearing as an advocate in the Superior Courts is confined exclusively to men who practise as advocates and nothing else. Let those who are charged with carrying into operation the recommendations of the Legal Education Commissioners establish two separate classes of examinations, one of a more practical, the other of a higher order. Let the passing of the former kind of examination, coupled with service under articles, entitle the Law Student to practise as an Attorney alone; let the passing of the higher examination entitle him to practise either as an Attorney or as an Advocate, as he pleases.

"In the United States this mixed systemunder which partnerships are formed, of which

242

Law of Attorneys.-Law of Costs.-Notes on Recent Statutes.

one member practises as an Advocate and the of the Rolls said :-"I can have no doubt, others as Attorneys-has long existed with from the information I have received from the best results to the Profession and to the the officers of the Court, and also from the Public. It exists in this metropolis:-Mr. case in 1 Keen,1 that the four day order Lawrance, the ablest practitioner in our Courts does not include costs. The order must, of Bankruptcy, is an Attorney in partnership therefore, be varied in that respect." In re with other Attorneys. In bankruptcy he

prac

tises, and with marked ability, almost exclu- Christmas, 19 Beav. 519.

sively, as an Advocate, leaving the preparatory and chamber business to be transacted by his partners. Now, what an absurdity it is that a

accounts.

LAW OF COSTS.

TION SERVED.

A petition was afterwards presented (since the 15 & 16 Vict. c. 86) relating to the exchange and inclosure of lands, and which was served on the residuary legatees, who claimed to have their costs inserted in the order.

man of such proved ability as Mr. Lawrance or UNNECESSARY APPEARANCE ON PETIshould not have the right to make the commonIn a suit for the administration of an estate, est motion in our Superior Courts of Equity or Common Law, but should be compelled, if he a considerable number of annuitants, who were wants to do so, to retain the services of some young gentleman in horsehair, who has quali- interested in the residue (if any) in the event fied himself for the practice of his Profession of the testator's daughter having no children, by spending a certain number of hours in a had always been served with the petitions relecture-room, in addition to eating a certain lating to the estate and attended taking the number of dinners in a hall. How oppressive it is that if Mr. Lawrance wished to procure a call to the Bar, he could only do it by renouncing, for at least three years, the exercise of that branch of the Profession in which he is now engaged. No, sir, perfect freedom in this, as in all other departments of human activity, is the only true rule. Let the lawyer who has talents for advocacy act as an Advocate, let the man who has talents for attorneyship act as an Attorney; let both combine their separate capacities, if so minded, into one firm, discarding their present unnatural relationship of real patronage on the one side, and simulated distance on the other, looking to the public as their own patrons, and to professional merit as the sole passport to success. By the adoption of this plan, I believe, that while the Vainlabours would be benefited, the Silverspoons would not be injured, and the public, which really should go for something in the matter, would be the greatest gainers of all."

LAW OF ATTORNEYS AND SOLI-
CITORS.

FOUR DAY ORDER ON SOLICITOR TO DE-
LIVER BILL OF COSTS.

AN order was made on May 11, 1854, with costs, on a solicitor to deliver his bill of costs within four days or stand committed, and on the same day notice was given for the 13th to draw up the order, which was done accordingly on that day in the solicitor's absence.

On a motion to discharge or vary the order, upon the ground of irregularity, there being but one day intervening between the notice and the passing, and also that costs were never given in such an order.

Mr. Bidwell, the Registrar, on being referred to by the Court, said that by the practice of the office, notice of drawing up an order served on one day for the next was regular; and on the other point the Master

The Master of the Rolls said that the costs must be refused. Day v. Croft, 19 Bear. 518.

OF

APPLICATION

ON NON-ATTORNING TENANT TO PAY ARREARS OF RENT.

A tenant of certain property of which a receiver had been appointed in the cause, refused to make any further payment for rent, stating he had received notice from two defendants not to do so.

The receiver died and a new receiver was appointed, to whom the tenant still refused to pay rent, although applied to.

On motion, upon notice, an order was made for payment of the arrears within 14 days, together with the costs of the application. Hobson v. Sherwood, 19 Beav. 575.

Notes on Recent Statutes.-Order in Chancery-Transfer of Causes.

representative of Lydia Sutton, and a person was appointed to represent her estate in the suit under the 15 & 16 Vict. c. 86, s. 44.

A sum of 4937. was found due to her estate which it was proposed to pay over to such representative.

The Master of the Rolls said, “I cannot order the money to be paid over to this gentleman, for he is not the legal personal representative. It must be carried over to the separate account of the 'legal personal representatives of Lydia Sutton.'' Byam v. Sutton, 19 Beav. 646.

ORDER OF COURT OF CHANCERY.

Foster v. Griffiths, cause.

Inman v. Davison, motion for decree
Horne v. Warr,
Abbott v. Darnell

Porter v. Berwick

Barker v. Delahunt, cause

do.

do.

do.

Hawthorn v. Shedden, motion for decree
Gibson v. Parsons,

Haddy v. Earle, cause

do.

Peterson v. Pigott, motion for decree
Nayler v. Laurie, cause

Wade v. Candler, motion for decree

CRANWORTH, C.

JOHN ROMILLY, M. R.

243

TRANSFER OF CAUSES.

WHEREAS from the present state of the business before the Lord Chancellor and the Master of the Rolls respectively, it is expedient that a portion of the Causes set down before the Lord Chancellor to be heard before the Vice-Chancellor Sir William Page Wood, and a portion of the Causes set down to be heard before the Master of the Rolls, should be respectively transferred to the Book of Causes

be heard before the Vice-Chancellor Sir John Stuart. Now, we do hereby Order that the several Causes set forth in the First Schedule hereunto subjoined, be accordingly transferred from the Book of Causes of the Master of the Rolls to that of the said ViceChancellor Sir John Stuart. And we do further Order that the Causes so to be transferred (although the Bills in such Causes may have been marked for the Master of the Rolls, under the Orders of Court of the 5th May, 1837, and notwithstanding any Decrees or Orders therein made by the Master of the Rolls) shall hereafter be considered and taken as Causes originally marked for the Lord Chancellor, and be subject to the same regu lations as all Causes marked for the Lord Chancellor, are subject to the same Orders. Provided, nevertheless, that no Decree or Order made by the Master of the Rolls in any such Causes shall be varied or reversed otherwise than by the Lord Chancellor or the Lords Justices. And I, the Lord Chancellor, do hereby Order, that the several Causes set forth in the Second Schedule hereunto subjoined, be transferred from the Book of Causes standing for hearing before the Vice-Chancellor Sir William Page Wood to the Book of Causes for hearing before the Vice-Chancellor Sir John Stuart. And this Order is to be drawn up by the Registrar and set up in the several Offices of this Court.

19th Jan.

CRANWORTH, C.
JOHN ROMILLY, M. R.

FIRST SCHEDULE.

From the Master of the Rolls' Book.

Powell v. Lovegrove, cause

Walker v. Cobb, motion for decree

To the Editor of the Legal Observer. SIR, I have carefully perused the Commissioners' Report respecting this subject, and, so far as they have gone, they appear to have evinced considerable labour and talent, which the Legal Profession and the Public must gratefully appreciate. Still my opinion is, that the report, if adopted, will not resuscitate the ancient Law University which existed in the days of the Tudors and the Stuarts, nor will it represent the learning of the law existing during this present reign, or in fact bear out the signification of its title of "Law University." In March, 1854, I communicated with the Right Honourable Joseph Napier on the subject of incorporating the Inns of Court and our Law Institution, and also generally respecting the education of our Students, and I received a most courteous reply, of which the following is a copy :

"1, Whitehall Gardens, Wednesday. "DEAR SIR, -The question of education of Solicitors and their Students is of great importance, and no doubt will engage the attention of the Commissioners. I would not specifically put it forward in my notice, as it might have added a difficulty which might have prejudiced my motion. It is not that I feel the less interest in it, but I have no doubt it will easily be followed up with satisfaction and success when we overcome the greater evil and difficulty of Bar admissions. The whole question of professional education is, I think, of great public consequence, and I anticipate a good result from the inquiry proposed.

"Most truly (in haste)

"J. NAPIER."

I submit there should be but one "Law University," with departments controlling the "Bar" and the "Roll," upon the graduating principle of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge. The proposed "Law University" must be defective in its title, as it impliedly includes all branches of the Law, whereas according to the Commissioners' Report, it will be in fact a University for Barristers only. I assume that two Universities or Colleges for studying the Law would be most invidious and unprecedented; because in the City Law Schools existing before 19 Henry 3, there was no division of Students. These schools were unfortunately suppressed by King Henry's proclamation, upon the promise of the Four Inns of Court to lead the Law themselves. Also, upon the authority of Coke, Fortescue, and other authors, the younger Students were

first instructed at the Inns of Chancery, and afterwards without division admitted into the Inns of Court. The members of the Inns of Chancery always were and are now Attorneys and Solicitors. In Lord Coke's time the Students were about 2,000 "filii nobilium and gentlemen born," at which period the population of England could not have exceeded oneeighth of the present number. And lastly, the rents and profits of the Inner and Middle Temples, granted to the Benchers thereof by charter from King James 1st in the 6th year of his reign, were to be applied unconditionally to the lodging and education of the Students and Professors of the Law.

Consequently, I do not conceive it would be just for the Legislature to grant a charter for the incorporation of the Societies of Barristers as a "Law Institution," without including every branch of the Law, while the members thereof should have equal constituent rights and privileges. Our Incorporated Law Society of Great Britain, being a corporate body representing Solicitors, Attorneys, and Proctors, should be included, pay its propor tion towards the revenues of the proposed "Law University," and possess equal rights comparatively to its pecuniary assistance as an Inn of Court. This condition should be respectfully, firmly, and energetically urged upon the notice of the Legislature as our just and consistent rights.

I think we have a locus standi in the scales of Justice when we ask that while the importance of our pecuniary position has been so seriously affected by the Legislature diminishing our incomes and by their in part removing the money barrier on entering our branch of the additional mental barrier, that our professional Profession, without supplying in its place an and social position should be maintained, if not raised, and that the Bar should not cast us in the shade by possessing, in addition to their present high favours in the realm, an exclusive crowning point of a Royal State " Law University," with power to confer upon themselves only legal honours and degrees. With such courtly favours, the Bar will be overcrowded by aspirants, and the excluded Roll "sent to Coventry " for want of Royal distinction.

The present exclusive course, I expect, will excite distrust and opposition, whilst much good to the contending parties will be lost.

Unita est vis"-Let the "Law University" be properly incorporated so that the pristine lustre of the ancient institution founded after the establishment of the Common Pleas may be revived with increased learning and renown.

The Commissioners have certainly laid down sufficient extent of learning to be acquired previously to an honour or degree being conferred; but why should not the Senate have the power, if not the wish, to confer also the degrees of Bachelor of Laws and Doctor of Laws,-likewise honours of a double first class, or first and other class Wranglers, and of an Associate of the University. I assume that the degree of “B. L.” should be accom